Football

New NCAA recruiting rules aim for ‘common sense’

Kansas University football coach Charlie Weis discusses KU’s recently signed junior-college transfers at a news conference on Thursday, Dec. 20, 2012, at KU.

Advertisement

The NCAA recently adopted more than 25 rule changes that range from financial and academic alterations to opening up the way high school athletes can be recruited.

While most of the changes are minor and simply tweak or clarify existing guidelines, the new rules could have a major impact on the way prep athletes make their decisions and, perhaps more significantly, could impact the way college coaches are forced to handle recruiting.

“The college football coaching profession is already a grind,” said Rivals.com recruiting analyst Jon Kirby, who has covered recruiting at Kansas University for more than a decade. “Those guys really don’t have much time where they get away from the office. With the new rules, the few times that they do get away, they won’t actually be able to get away from it. The college recruiter will be held hostage somewhat because they’ll always be on the clock now.”

Of all the amendments adopted last weekend, the three that will impact recruiting the most include the following:

Rule 11-4, which removes limits on the number of coaches who can recruit off-campus at any one time.

Rule 13-3, which eliminates restrictions on methods and modes of communication during recruiting.

Rule, 13-5-A, which will eliminate restrictions on sending printed recruiting materials to recruits.

In short, the very thing that former Oklahoma basketball coach Kelvin Sampson was penalized for, which led to his departure from OU, is now legal. As Kirby pointed out, not only can coaches and recruiters make as many phone calls or texts as they like, they also can receive as many as they desire from prospective recruits. That’s where the whole concept of being held hostage enters the picture.

“You’ve gotta be there to answer and respond to all of the calls you get,” Kirby said. “If you don’t, there’s gonna be another coach out there who does.”

According to the NCAA’s official website, the reason for adopting the proposed rule changes was to create “a more flexible manual based on common sense.”

According to the release on NCAA.org, the changes, which are scheduled to go into effect Aug. 1, include enhanced academic eligibility standards for incoming freshmen and student-athletes who transfer from two-year colleges, the creation of a tie between a team’s academic performance and participation in NCAA championships, a revamped enforcement and Committee on Infractions process, and a multi-year scholarship model.

While those will impact nearly all universities in some way or another during the next several years, the rules aimed at recruiting may have the biggest impact, particularly at a school like KU and with a program such as football, where keeping up with and competing against conference foes such as Texas and Oklahoma already are difficult tasks.

There are, of course, several advantages to the new rules, as long as a school and its coaches are willing to take advantage of them. Based on the way KU football coach Charlie Weis has shown himself to be willing to pound the pavement to get players, KU could be one of those schools that benefits.

“Everybody’s on the same level,” Kirby said. “It’s in each program’s hands now.”

Said NCAA Board of Directors chairman, Nathan Hatch: “When this process is complete, Division I should operate with rules that create more ways to provide for our student-athletes and are easier to understand and apply.”

With just a couple of open spots remaining, Weis and company have less than two weeks remaining to wrap up recruiting the Class of 2013. In all, 25 players in the current class have orally committed to KU. Ten of those signed with the Jayhawks in December and the remaining members of the list of commitments will be eligible to sign their letters of intent starting Feb. 6.

Comments

NCAA's first item of common sense. Have cbssports.com write an article exposing what Frank Haith did/allowed at Miami. Have a source from the NCAA who knew of the letter Haith was about to receive, who knew of what Shapiro and Shapiro's mother knew about the money paid for the player. Write about the check that the mother presented to the NCAA. Write the story understanding Haith more than likely would be given a show-cause and fired. Get all Mizzou fans upset saying they never wanted Haith anyway. Get Mizzou excited about hiring another basketball coach not named Frank Haith. Then the next day tell everyone the case is on hold. Not because the facts were wrong, the facts were quite obviously right on target. But because the facts were gathered in a way the NCAA didn't think was appropriate.

JayHok - As much as we may dislike MU, we have to dislike the NCAA more. The next target of the NCAA's incompetence may be KU. Process is important even when it targets one that deserves it, because the next target may be one that does not deserve it.

It just seems amazing to me that the NCAA essentially is guilty of lack of oversight in its investigations, and then hammers coaches for lack of oversight.

The NCAA just needs to revise its protocol for handling investigations. They take way too long to clear players. They focus on trivial things. All while missing the big picture in their rules.

The biggest hypocrisy is that a kid can be ruled ineligible because a family of a player in desperate need of money took a few thousand dollars in benefits (such as transportation and lodging) from an AAU coach, but another kid can get drafted by the Yankees, get a million dollar contract, then come back and play "amateur" college basketball.

Or they miss some little deal like a big Chicago newspaper refusing to retract an article about a future NBA number one overall draft pick's Dad getting $200,000 (from a school in a state known for it's blue grass) for his son's services.

Sorry for the awkward wording...I don't want this removed for violation of the web site agreement. They've been touchy about me mentioning this with names in the past.

H E M,
You are right on about going after a school because of something trivial. Such as the gift of a jacket during a visit or help from an AAU coach. I can tell you from experience our family has become close friends with our AAU coach and his family who weve known for many years.
So I can't give his daughter a ku shirt or he can't take our daughters to a college game 80 miles down the road? He has a full time job not related to sports and volunteers.

That isn't money under the table or doing something "unfair". I seem to remember ku got dinged because a coach bought a homesick player a $200 airfare ticket to go home for thanksgiving; or was it Christmas? I've seen the housemother of our fraternity do the same.
Both acts were from the heart.

Common sense isn't so common anymore and the NCAA needs to drop this trivial stuff.
It's like cops handing out parking tickets while a bank gets robbed on the next block.

The airfare ticket was for a trip home for a grandmother's funeral (who also happened to be the main guardian for him). This was under Larry Brown...and one was one of the violations that caused rule changes.